A recent article published in the Harvard Business Review (HBR) by Dr. Sandro Galea, M.D., Dean, Boston University School of Public Health, rightfully claims that measuring the value of population health programs is challenging. “Measures” are focused on groups of individuals within a given population as a whole. The issue comes in the gaps created in the socio-economic, life-style, health status and ethnic characteristics of those constituting the group. For example, diet behavioral modification programs to combat obesity using Smartphone and iPad technology will likely be more successful for “populations” within populations who have access to these technologies.

Ideally, these programs would target those who don’t have readily-available access to technology to produce improved results across the socio-economic spectrum. It’s widely documented that obesity levels are higher among people in lower-income brackets. Dr. Galeo suggests that the gap be closed by targeting the lower end of the spectrum among defined populations to level the success rate of healthy living programs. Doing so creates more equitable outcomes, higher rates of success and, thus, healthier populations.

This seems logical and easy, yet it requires a shift in our “values.” I tend to agree with Dr. Galea’s conclusions in that bridging health equity gaps closes social divides, defies the “Cadillac-care” notion and allows for greater, streamlined connectivity for everyone. Moving population health measures from absolute to inter-group differences may be a challenging shift, yet it would seem to create greater equity … achieving the larger goal in health and healthcare.

Last minute, I was given a ticket to the Pope’s Mass at the Basilica. VERY EXCITING! His concluding words resonated quite clearly for me: “Siempre Adelante! Keep moving forward! Today, like him (Fr. Serra), may we be able to say: Forward! Let’s keep moving forward!”

On Monday, March 16, the Bipartisan Policy Committee (BPC) convened government and private sector experts to discuss the policy actions needed to accelerate the discovery, development and delivery of medical products. Aligning public policy with innovation will save and improve lives, reduce the burden of chronic disease, and maintain global competitiveness in medical innovation. This is particularly relevant for underserved and at-risk populations who often have challenges accessing new drug therapies and treatment modalities due to socio-economic status and population health disparities. It was particularly enlightening to hear Marc Boutin, CEO, National Health Council, make specifc mention of persons with disabilities and those with chronic disease as populations that can particularly benefit from medical innovations to improve their health and well-being, daily living activity and overall quality of life. These groups can often be over-looked or side-lined when discussing and advancing policies to improve access to innovative health solutions. As a policy professional in the field of population health, who also happens to have a physical disability, I was heartened by BPC’s “inclusive” discussion to ensure quality healthcare for everyone.

http://bipartisanpolicy.org/events/advancing-medical-innovation-through-public-policy/